I totally disagree. Art can clearly be linked to social activism, but what Occupy has shown is that there is no replacement for people getting together in a space. Occupying space. Whatever it's other merits, a TV show or a play or a film doesn't do that. Both are indispensable components of a healthy culture. However I'd argue the best way to support the goals of Occupy is to occupy! There's no replacement for it.

Alyssa Rosenberg True. I totally agree with you, and my first comment was kind of strident. But I do think the 'big idea' is the importance of action. That any alternative should continue to bring people into the streets and empower them to accomplish something. And I feel that artists and people of conscience can't replace the importance and value of direct participation with art, though art has its own, important value. Though, I have yet to live up to my words..... :/

Adam Cahan I mean, I tend to think that people have different things to contribute to movements. And if artists can get people talking about credit card debt or the non-dischargability of student loan debt, that's a productive contribution to the movement.

That quote is an extreme position, but it's essence and source (The Utility of History) capture my point. Which, I guess, is that in an environment which in so many ways covers facts and rational thought behind a veil, it becomes essential to focus on what's most important - the _reason_ we wish to inspire conversation and raise awareness. That the means are too easily decoupled from the end, and what I see in the emphasis on action in Occupy is an unobstructed view of what our end, as citizens, is.